Global warming discussion III

[aleCcowaN]

Formally, not yet.

"Due to the weak strength of the El Niño, widespread or significant global weather pattern impacts are not anticipated."

So far, if confirmed, this weak Niño and its forecasts are resembling that of July2004/January2005 and the neutral slightly above 0 rest of 2005. Check what happened then to evaluate possible impacts.

I have it peaking by the end of the year, but the forecasting system is a slightly better version of the one that had me expecting a peak by the end of last year with a 50% probability (as stated in this very thread). So I expect we may improve the forecast systems further.

 

[aleCcowaN]

I forgot to tell that even though such a weak El Niño, 2015 may become the warmest year in record (the probability of that is high), so we'd have 2014 and 2015 as back to back warmest years on record. Do you remember the last time that happened?

 

[Warmer1]

Then we have something important to discuss: is that trend of 2 watts per square metre and decade a real one?


* You might give me the credit of not having a 0.2 mistaken as a 2.

Again ??????? Really?

 

[aleCcowaN]

Again ??????? Really?

<Last chance, before sending you to the oblivion section>

Let me remind you cross-multiplication:

If 0.2 watt per square metre and decade is the 10% of X, how much is X?

 

[bit_pattern]

will be interesting to see how trash sites like WUWT fares...



http://www.newscientist.com/article...es-based-on-facts-not-links.html#.VPNhf0J4bHA

I can hear the howls of protest by Monckton ans Inhofe et al now.

Good on google...we'll see how it actually plays out.

He's already howling like a child that's been threatened with having its toys taken away

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2015/03/05/google-works-to-rank-sites-based-on-truthfulness/

That fact is not controversial, but critics worry that this is a first step towards Google playing God and effectively censoring content it does not like. They fear that skeptics of things like climate change or more immigration (both subjects that Google founders have expressed strong feelings about) might find their websites buried if this ranking system were adopted.

“I worry about this issue greatly… My site gets a significant portion of its daily traffic from Google,” Anthony Watts, who runs Watts Up With That, a popular blog that is skeptical of global warming claims, told FoxNews.com.

“It is a very slippery and dangerous slope because there’s no arguing with a machine,” he added.

 

[aleCcowaN]

They can always have both Koch brothers financing their own search engine, and name it Ask Chills.

 

[macdoc]

thanks for the link.....sometimes the right wing just CANNOT see the irony..from that link

They’re very good at debunking myths if they upset liberals, but if it’s a liberal or left-wing falsehood, the fact-checkers don’t seem as excited about debunking it,” Rich Noyes, research director at the Media Research Center, told FoxNews.com.

He cited a 2013 study by George Mason University researchers, which found that fact-checking site Politifact declared 52% of Republican claims it looked at to be false, but did the same to just 24% of Democratic claims.

did it ever occur to him that it's the repuglies that ARE getting it wrong 52% of the time ( not surprising )

Watts would lead the pack in pseudo-science wiki ranking. I do hope Google implements fact checking....even if it's a clickable option like the scholar articles.

I must admit typing climate change into google from Australia is reasonably free of nonsense

Meant to link to this earlier...and it came up on that search...

Climate change: why the Guardian is putting threat to Earth front and centre

http://www.theguardian.com/environm...ange-guardian-threat-to-earth-alan-rusbridger

not a glimmer of WUWT.......so Dear Anthony complains and all of a sudden his site gets the treatment it deserves.....

As the Guardian confirms by making it front and centre....climate change issues are too important globally to be left as a popularity contest left alone paid disinformation as WUWT is so fond of doing.

 

[logger]

Here's more truth for the foolish warmists!

http://www.climatedepot.com/2015/03...-a-chemical-a-molecule-essential-to-life-co2/

 

[logger]

I forgot to tell that even though such a weak El Niño, 2015 may become the warmest year in record (the probability of that is high), so we'd have 2014 and 2015 as back to back warmest years on record. Do you remember the last time that happened?

So are we back to doing weather again? We had one of our coldest winters ever.

 

[CapelDodger]

not a glimmer of WUWT.......so Dear Anthony complains and all of a sudden his site gets the treatment it deserves......

Google isn't actually using it yet. The denier cult really is dying on its feet.

Notice how much of their product is defensive, self-referential, and/or re-cycled. This is the behaviour of a cult in the process of encystment.

 

[bit_pattern]

Here's more truth for the foolish warmists!

http://www.climatedepot.com/2015/03...-a-chemical-a-molecule-essential-to-life-co2/

Just because CO2 is essential to life does not negate the fact that it also has properties causing it to trap heat in the atmosphere.

Water is also essential for life, but if you drink to much of it you can poison yourself.

Sodium is essential to life, but consume too much of it and you'll develop hypertension and heart disease.

Oxygen is essential for life, but put a human body under the right kind of pressure it quickly becomes toxic.

Phosphorous and nitrogen are essential for life, but take them out of the ground and let it run-off into waterways they cause algal blooms that choke and kill everything in the hydrological system

Etc etc etc.

Nature is simply brimming with examples of things that can be good in one context but bad in another.

Even my 8 year old niece can think her way through that one.

 

[logger]

Even my 8 year old nephew can think his way through that one.

Does your eight year old realize we only contribute 1% of co2 maybe?

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

So are we back to doing weather again? We had one of our coldest winters ever.

Depending on where you are that "coldest" winter probably shoulda been up around the arctic. For a third year in a row the mid Atlantic coast and southern states had arctic air masses droop down from the north. Weather is not climate.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

Does your eight year old realize we only contribute 1% of co2 maybe?

Citation please

 

[bit_pattern]

Does your eight year old realize we only contribute 1% of co2 maybe?

My 8 year old niece is smart enough to conceptualise that if you inject a new input into an otherwise closed system, it becomes unbalanced. Lets use a water fountain as an analogy - despite the fact that a large amount of water is circulating through the system, if you add a hose to the reservoir running at 1% the rate of the water being pumped through the fountain then the reservoir will inevitably overflow. Currently, natural processes remove about half of the extra CO2 we are adding to the system, yet CO2 levels have steadily increased over the span of 200 years to the point of being 50% higher than they've been in over a million years. My niece is definitely smart enough to think through the implications there.

 

[aleCcowaN]

So are we back to doing weather again? We had one of our coldest winters ever.

It feels summery here.

logger, logger ... you're unable to grasp the difference between the whole planet and your neck of the woods.

 

[logger]

My 8 year old niece is smart enough to conceptualise that if you inject a new input into an otherwise closed system, it becomes unbalanced. Lets use a water fountain as an analogy - despite the fact that a large amount of water is circulating through the system, if you add a hose to the reservoir running at 1% the rate of the water being pumped through the fountain then the reservoir will inevitably overflow. Currently, natural processes remove about half of the extra CO2 we are adding to the system, yet CO2 levels have steadily increased over the span of 200 years to the point of being 50% higher than they've been in over a million years. My niece is definitely smart enough to think through the implications there.

A closed system, lol. A few decent volcano eruptions throws your closed system into a tail spin.

 

[logger]

It feels summery here.

logger, logger ... you're unable to grasp the difference between the whole planet and your neck of the woods.

aleccowan, aleccowan.... you're unable to grasp that you brought up weather.

I was just bringing you back to reality.

 

[bit_pattern]

It feels summery here.

It's summer in the southern hemisphere, ergo winter in the northern hemisphere can't possibly exist and the axial tilt theory of seasonal variation is falsified.

QED, bitches!

 

[bit_pattern]

A closed system, lol. A few decent volcano eruptions throws your closed system into a tail spin.

Sigh... No, volcanic activity is accounted for in the natural carbon cycle and, ironically enough, accounts for far less input than human activity - at least it does on any kind of temporal scale even vaguely relevant to the issue we're discussing.